I think that's exactly what Jason was eluding to.Originally Posted by CH@Dbee
I think that's exactly what Jason was eluding to.
You hit the nail on the head where this topic is concerned.
Thanks, Jason for making this thread. Later, QD.
FOR MORE INFO, CLICK THE PIC!!!
Dear Jason,
Can you do a write up on what makes a person a tuner? I am confused because I have a certificate that says I am a tuner, but I have never tuned a car. Does that make me a tuner?
Signed,
Anonymous GA Tuner
LOLOL! I was going to make an analogy using the word tuner earlier but knew it would open a whole new can of worms. If anything mentions "tuner scene" or "tuner cars" I don't even bother looking at it 99.9% of the time. Theoretically if the term was used correctly then those phrases would interest me the most, just like photo shoot would, yet they're always misrepresenting the subject.
And yeah, you're more of a Tuner than any chick I know! :boobies:
i think "photoshoot" is used way to much too. kinda the same with going and buying a dslr and on every picture you take putting "joe blow photography". there's alot of good picture's posted on this forum but not everyone is a photographer. i have a d40 and love taking picture's of my car and other things to get better and always ask for some C/C but have never claimed a photoshoot or to be a photographer.
oh yea, kinda the same with "JDM". just because you have a stock from the show room civic, that dont make it "JDM".
LOL. Thanks.
I meant more like as in A/F manipulation. It's true that I have a certificate for that....but I would never let me tune a car.
I get what your saying Jason, but I think photo shoot is a pretty general term. Since a photo is a recording of light, and a shoot is what's done when the camera is taking pictures. The difference is when you're shooting frames for fun, for leisure, or as a paid assignment.
And since I technically fall under the distinction of one of the people who's "diluting the industry" and since I also started shooting in parking garages, because I would get run out of lots of places, I guess that also makes me less of a photographer than the rest of you. Especially since I also can't afford a nicer camera.
But for what it's worth I've literally used my camera until it wouldn't shoot anymore. I've been shooting with my Rebel XT for almost four years now, and I've taken over five hundred thousand pictures with it. 500,000+ pictures on a camera that's supposed to have a shutter life of like 150,000-200,000. If my experience counts for nothing, and everyone else is a real photographer, because they have nicer shit, then so be it.
I've never gotten paid for any of my work, not because I didn't want to, but because I was young and enthusiastic about it, and mostly didn't know how to go about it. Plus I always thought experience was more important in the long run. So now despite the fact that I've been doing this for as long, if not longer than most of the people here, some how I magically find myself in the same category as the people who are "diluting the industry". Which I'm not going to lie, I feel a bit insulting.
This is an industry where an elitist attitude doesn't really mean shit, or serve any purpose at all, and where the quality of someones work is generally what speaks for itself. But it's all gravy, when I'm not broke, and not in college, I'll happily buy a shiny new high end camera so I can do real "photoshoots" and be a real "photographer." And I can assure you, that when that day comes, all of my industry diluting experience won't count for nothing.
However I do agree, that the term "photoshoot" is over used, especially when people are blatantly ignorant of the rules of composition and making awful exposures, but I don't think the laymen know of a better word for it.
Last edited by DrivenMind; 11-20-2008 at 01:40 PM.
agreed with drivenmind.
i do a lot of freelance work now. although as any photographer knows, we all need to start somewhere, and the price you paid for your equipment doesn't mean crap as to how well of a photographer you are. my first SLR was a XTi, today i am on a 40D. the more money you spend on equipment doesn't make your pictures better, but it takes the person behind the camera, as a photographer i dont take any offense to folks calling it a photoshoot because if they are shooting photos then thats what it is, it doesn't matter if they rented a studio, or did it in some back ally in bankhead.
and besides how can YOU define what a photoshoot really is. sometimes you are in a studio, sometimes not.
sometimes you get paid, sometimes you dont
sometimes you have models, sometimes you have landscapes.
dude there are so many different types of shoots, dont discriminate against those who dont make a primary living off of photography.
get over it speedminded, don't be a little girl about it.
The point is a the definition of "photo shoot" is pertaining to the fashion industry or commercial advertising, not someone going out and simply taking pictures. The definition can't be any more clear. I never once said anything about equipment required and I've NEVER once ever referred to anything I've done as photo shoot even though I have shot things and people for commercial use. I have more respect for people that actually do photo shoots to call something what it isn't.
Just as if I went to my garage and installed a cage in one of my cars and put slicks on it I still wouldn't call it a race car. It's not a race car until it's been inspected and used as such.
*edit*
I take that back, I referred to some promotional shots for sponsorships as a photo shoot in 2005
Last edited by speedminded; 11-23-2008 at 08:09 PM.
x384
Jason is correct. The term photo shoot refers to model or portraiture photography, not car photography. We can debate this till the end of time and always have different opinions. The barebones of it comes down to :
Model/Portraiture photography is called a photo shoot.
Cars/Landscape/Architecture is just taking pictures.
Jason, I think, was not discriminating against those who do not make a living in photography but rather those that go out and buy a camera and take photos of a car in a parking lot with light poles coming out of the roof and call it a photo shoot.
this is stupid.
drivenmind is the most correct on here. i'm in the same boat... hardly ever charge for pictures, ive had my 20d for 5 years, probably close to 400,000 or so exposures. photoshoot is a very general term. people on here just need to look over what someone says. the internet really isn't serious business.
LOL, like I said we can debate this till the end of time.
And Drivenmind is wrong on one point. The XT is only rated to 50k. And for those that are claiming to have half a million actuations, when was the last time you checked for sure.
i have around 10,000 on my 40D since getting it last spring. curious if anyone knows what the life of my canon shutter is rated at??
Canon EOS Digital Rebel XTi / 400D 50,000
Canon EOS Digital Rebel XT / 350D 50,000
Canon EOS 50D 100,000
Canon EOS 40D 100,000
Canon EOS 30D 100,000
Canon EOS 20D 50,000
Canon EOS 5D 100,000
Canon EOS 1D Mark III 300,000
Canon EOS 1D Mark II N 200,000
Canon EOS 1DS Mark III 300,000
Canon EOS 1DS Mark II 200,000
with all respect to you and jason(most OG photographers in this thread) by the true meaning of a "photo shoot" it has nothing to do with what your subject is as long as that subject is being used to promote something. if i take pictures of an apartment complex and they are using those photos for their website to promote the apartments and get new tenants then that is a photo shoot. if i take pictures of an really hot 19 year old girl for her to give the photos to her boyfriend for christmas and never use the photos for a modeling portfolio that is not a photo shoot.
It doesn't always have to be promoting something. There is a fine line on how the term should be used. I relegate using the term to my model shoots I do for magazines or portfolios. Everything else is just taking photos (even when I shot for Patron).
Like I said, this can be debated till the end of time and everyone will always defend their opinion and never have a resolution. Just google "Photo Shoot Definition" and the majority of the def. will describe fashion or portrait photography.
Let me ask this:
RB
SR
KA
Which is better??? LOLOLOLOLOLOL! I love myself.
dictionary.com:
Main Entry: photo shoot
Part of Speech: n
Definition: such a session for commercial purposes, such as a fashion magazine
Thanks Chad.....preciate that buddy......
Who let the split tail out the cage again????.......Let me ask this:
RB
SR
KA
dictionary.com:
Main Entry: photo shoot
Part of Speech: n
Definition: such a session for commercial purposes, such as a fashion magazine
I just think the main problem which caused the reason for this thread is that DSLR's are getting wayy too affordable these days. I mean lets face it, go back a few years... not everyone could drop that kind of money on a camera.
Having a DSLR is like a fad these days, half the people want to be "cool" and the other half just bought one cause theyre about a dime a dozen now. I mean take a look at the varsity meets, a few months ago I'd RARELY see anyone with a DSLR walking around but now... its hard to find someone with a P&S.
Any ding dong can buy some entry level DSLR (nothing wrong with that, i shoot with one too :P), and a 50mm 1.8 and crank out pictures that the average joe will gawk over for hours.
Hell I've seen photos from people toting around pro-sumer camera bodies and their photos flat out suck, and I'm not saying someone who just recently got the camera and doesnt really know how to use it. I'm saying theyve had the camera for an extensive amount a time, and are under the impression that their camera is going to produce great photos just because its a DSLR.
Recently I've really contemplated selling all my gear, and picking up a canon G9/G10 and do my "photoshoots" with that
dont take anything i say srsly. its the interwebs.
Thanks Chad.....preciate that buddy......
you OG too son!
very true. i got my d50 for 400 bucks! im glad they are cheaper, if they werent i wouldnt be able to afford a SLR. some people might remember back in 06 i was into photography but could not afford a SLR, i had a canon powershot....I just think the main problem which caused the reason for this thread is that DSLR's are getting wayy too affordable these days. I mean lets face it, go back a few years... not everyone could drop that kind of money on a camera.
Having a DSLR is like a fad these days, half the people want to be "cool" and the other half just bought one cause theyre about a dime a dozen now. I mean take a look at the varsity meets, a few months ago I'd RARELY see anyone with a DSLR walking around but now... its hard to find someone with a P&S.
Any ding dong can buy some entry level DSLR (nothing wrong with that, i shoot with one too :P), and a 50mm 1.8 and crank out pictures that the average joe will gawk over for hours.
Hell I've seen photos from people toting around pro-sumer camera bodies and their photos flat out suck, and I'm not saying someone who just recently got the camera and doesnt really know how to use it. I'm saying theyve had the camera for an extensive amount a time, and are under the impression that their camera is going to produce great photos just because its a DSLR.
Recently I've really contemplated selling all my gear, and picking up a canon G9/G10 and do my "photoshoots" with that
i ended up selling it cause i needed money and just a year ago i got the the point i could afford a used SLR
some people saying to equipment being cheap dilutes things and puts out "bad" photographers but i look at it like people will get better or quit, so fuck it.
It matters to more people than you think. Trust me.
Look at it this way:
YOU own a car dealership. YOU are very straight up and good with your customers. YOU work hard and spend lots of money to maintain that reputation. Your neighbor throws up a rickety sign and buys a bunch of rust buckets and calls himself a car dealer. He tries to steal the nails off the cross with everybody that walks in. HE gives your hard effort a bad name. Now.....do you think you'd like that?
Just to play devil's advocate here for a second...say I am Joe Shmoe with my rusty cars down the street from your nice dealership. What about the people out there who don't really care about having a nice, pristine vehicle? What about the person that goes to your dealership, sees what you have for sale for $XXX and then sees what I have for 25% of that, and maybe thinks to themselves that, to the average person, it is perfectly fine and acceptable to have said rust bucket? It's called competition and it's something you need to accept. Whether you set out with a budget and story boards and model and full-frame camera's or I set out with my Xsi and 17-40L, it doesn't really matter...in the end, my pictures could be better than yours, and I could have done it for free, but yet you have the nerve to tell my I can't call what I just did a photoshoot? GTFO.
"Cool car" less.
Anti-Nutswingers Crew - Member # 001
1. Call it what it is then. Call yourself "lot full of rust buckets" and then it will be competition because you are competing on a level playing field w/o false advertising. If you have a lot full of Katrina flood cars that LOOK like cars on my lot, yet you paid pennies on the dollar BECAUSE they were UNDER WATER.....then you are not comparing apples to apples.
2. Another analogy:
Are you going to take your race car to a Jiffy Lube to get worked on? Why not? They have the same brand of tools, they have the uniforms, they have the time......why not then? Maybe because they don't have the KNOWLEDGE? Well, if some sucker is willing to buy a Katrina car just because you're selling it for less than I am selling a non-flooded car......is he a sucker for not doing his homework or are you a snake for not telling him? Either way he gets the shaft, right? Does that make you a better DEALER than me??? Not in my book. Same applies to Photography.
Much like APC, fart can exhausts, and huge park bench spoilers gave our hobby a bad name. Every Tom, Dick, and Harry who happens to pick up a camera and calls every shot he/she takes a "photoshoot" waters down our hobby.
Go look on CL right now. There are a ton of ads looking for photographers for FREE.......Why? Because there are tons of people doing it, so why not? They want studio time, lights, professional results.....FOR FREE. Ok, so photographers have to spend thousands of dollars, their own time, their own efforts, and you want to give them WHAT in return???? Nothing? Whatever.
Let's all just walk into Walmart and take stuff we want for free. See how that works. Wait, let's go to the Dr's office and let them do what they do and then just flick them off when they ask for payment. Better yet, let's all go to where YOU work and get YOU to do what YOU do only to turn around and tell you
The problem is though, and I cant really speak for myself, is that some people are doing this full time for living. Its what they do to put food on their tables, and pay their bills each month.
Joe shmoe down the street, most likely has a day job, and is just doing the whole photo thing as a hobby and doesnt really care to make money in the process, the money thing is more of an added bonus for what he is doing, therefore he charges a lower rate.
Is he wrong in doing what he's doing? Most likely not, but a lot of people do not know what its worth. He'll I havent had anyone come up to me lately and ask for pics because everyone here these days is toting around a DSLR. I'm glad I don't do this full time
So you went from playing Devils Advocate to getting butt hurt.
Can someone with an XSi and an L lens shoot better than someone with a 1Ds and an L lens, yes. I have seen it first hand. I have also seen the influx of soccer moms and wanna be photogs kill the lively hood for professional photogs. I don't make a living from shooting but it is a side business and it does make it harder to make money thanks to "weasels."
Do you shoot models or portrait (not family gatherings or immediate family)? If so then you have done a photo shoot. If not then yes, I have the nerve to say what you have shot is not a photo shoot.
Sure, but why should I call myself "lot full of rust buckets" when people can see exactly what there is in front of them (some kind of a portfolio). You are going a little off track by comparing this all to flood cars because although a flood car might look fine and not be, a photograph that looks fine is in fact that, fine.
Again, it doesn't really matter. If a client hires a photographer without seeing some sort of a portfolio, then that specific client is a fucking moron and deserves whatever they get. But if they see a portfolio and that is what they are looking for, who are you to say that they are wrong to use the "Jiffy Lube" photographer.
I agree with you, if I sell a flooded car without informing the client of said damage, then yes, I am a no good piece of garbage...BUT we are not selling cars here, we are selling photography...and like I said above, if a client hires me without seeing my work, they are a moron, but chances are, they will (or won't) hire me after seeing my work, and if my work is the type of thing that they are looking for at the price they are looking for, sucks to be you.
Now you are going off track. You guys were making this argument as professional photographers, not hobbyists...which one is it?
I don't deny that there are millions of ads looking for free work right now, but that's the thing, they are looking for FREE work and there are people out there willing to do it free. You are not losing any business there because the people from those ads are willing to take the lesser quality for the reduced price. If the free work wasn't available, I can guarantee you, 99% of those people looking for photographers would not be looking.Go look on CL right now. There are a ton of ads looking for photographers for FREE.......
Maybe what you guys need to be pissed off with is not the amateurs calling themselves photographers, but every chick on the internet with a pair of heels calling herself a model.
I don't even know how to respond to this. We started out discussing people asking for free stuff and others giving them free stuff. Now you are talking about stealing.Let's all just walk into Walmart and take stuff we want for free. See how that works. Wait, let's go to the Dr's office and let them do what they do and then just flick them off when they ask for payment. Better yet, let's all go to where YOU work and get YOU to do what YOU do only to turn around and tell you
"Cool car" less.
Anti-Nutswingers Crew - Member # 001
I agree with you 100%. What I am saying is, you don't have the right to tell these people what they can or can't call what they are doing. They might charge less, they might suck ass at it, but it doesn't change the fact that they are out doing a photoshoot.The problem is though, and I cant really speak for myself, is that some people are doing this full time for living. Its what they do to put food on their tables, and pay their bills each month.
Joe shmoe down the street, most likely has a day job, and is just doing the whole photo thing as a hobby and doesnt really care to make money in the process, the money thing is more of an added bonus for what he is doing, therefore he charges a lower rate.
Is he wrong in doing what he's doing? Most likely not, but a lot of people do not know what its worth. He'll I havent had anyone come up to me lately and ask for pics because everyone here these days is toting around a DSLR. I'm glad I don't do this full time
It's like me saying, "I'm headed to the park to play some baseball with my friends." And then you coming back with, "Fuck you, you can't say you play baseball unless you are in the MLB making 6 figures."
"Cool car" less.
Anti-Nutswingers Crew - Member # 001
I am not butt hurt...that entire quote was me playing devils advocate.So you went from playing Devils Advocate to getting butt hurt.
Can someone with an XSi and an L lens shoot better than someone with a 1Ds and an L lens, yes. I have seen it first hand. I have also seen the influx of soccer moms and wanna be photogs kill the lively hood for professional photogs. I don't make a living from shooting but it is a side business and it does make it harder to make money thanks to "weasels."
Do you shoot models or portrait (not family gatherings or immediate family)? If so then you have done a photo shoot. If not then yes, I have the nerve to say what you have shot is not a photo shoot.
And to answer your question...I don't "shoot anything". I am 110% a hobbyist and I am trying to learn, but I have no desire nor plan to EVER call myself a professional, nor do I ever plan to make money off of it. It's like drag racing...it's fun as hell, I would do it all the time if I could afford to, but I don't plan on ever making a living off of it.
"Cool car" less.
Anti-Nutswingers Crew - Member # 001
YES! THANK YOU! That was exactly the damn statement I was looking for to sum this whole argument up! Cool points for you
And another thing. Theres too many damn "pro photographers" (not naming any names) bitching and complaining about what people can and cant do, and what this is and what this isn't with their "Holyer than thou" attitudes. Ive never seen so much of this whining from people who claim to be great at what they do. Just STFU and do what you do
Why are you so upset hotshot? This is a discussion on what a photo shoot is, a public debate. And who are these "pro" photographers you are referring to?
Oh ok, thought the "Devil's Advocate" speech went to a personal rant towards the end. My advice is to find a good photography forum and just read. You can find a ton of info and a lot of people who can help in your area of interest.
I know its a public debate and im stating my public opinion. Maybe its just a bad day or whatever, but with all that aside, im tired of the negativity and destructive critisism hidden behind facades. I can see through the BS. Those who im speaking of know who they are
Do you have any clue what you are arguing for?
The point of the thread is not about what any one does for a living or the equipment used. The definition of "photo shoot" pertains ONLY to fashion and/or commercial advertisements, nothing else. The same "photo shoot" can be done with a $20 35mm bought from a pawn shop or a $40,000 Hasselblad, it doesn't matter...it's the subject and purpose that makes it a "photo shoot" or not.
What are you implying when you title "photo shoot" in a pictures forum? That you went out and took photos? lol. It is indeed in the pictures forum isn't it? Isn't that a little redundant? That's like putting "WTB" in a thread title in the "WTB" forum, of course it's "wanted to buy" because it's "WTB" forum. Same goes the items in the "for sale" section.
This thread is about the incorrect use of the word and nothing else. Until Webster changes the definition of "Photo shoot" to "taking photos" then my argument stands. Very few people have done "photo shoots" on this forum, me included.
Actually you have.
i did a photoshoot today.....
14 inch 4x100 BBS BMW basket weaves[CHEAP]
right? those pictures were used for promotion! im using them to try and sell something.
i did a photoshoot ha
ROTFLMAO
Technically yes, pertaining to models for a company at least. Then Konig using one of my photos for commercial advertising turned me taking a couple car snapshots into a "photo shoot" after the fact...so I don't count it.
The day a company calls me up requesting my services so they advertise their products, gives me a shot list, time and date, etc. is the day I call it a photo shoot.
Nope, it's not commercial advertising...unless you are in fact a company then the thread will get deleted, lol.i did a photoshoot today.....
14 inch 4x100 BBS BMW basket weaves[CHEAP]
right? those pictures were used for promotion! im using them to try and sell something.
i did a photoshoot ha
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
